Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    May 1, 2013 7:30am-8:01am PDT

7:30 am
will cover the second portion that focuses on the implementation. this gives you a quick picture. it is being done in san francisco and the coordination of land use and tran powertation planning are essential to this plan and as you know for sb375, the reduction of the greenhouse gases and the housing at levels. and the most important is the focus on local lands and the local additions, the local neighborhood planning to put together this plan. we are trying to address the economic health of the region and the retention of the open
7:31 am
space and natural resources and the effective use of our public investments and this is worth sharing the quality of life that we enjoy today with future generations. there has been a lot of analysis that we are not going into a lot of detail, but we are giving you a picture of the dimensions that have been assessed. we have been having a dialogue on this plan for a while and this gives you a picture of it being a couple of years in the making and sharing with you some of this input and at this point, we are taking public comments on the final draft. we had the session in san
7:32 am
francisco and we still have four more counties spending and so we are taking public comments as well as engaging in dialogues with you elected officials with planning staff, with transportation and, staff. again there are two essential pieces that were integrated. and the job strategy and the transportation strategy. i would like to give you a few highlights of how it is growing and how the plan attempts to address this growth trends. over all these numbers are you might have seen them before, 1.1 million jobs into the region, and 2.1 million people and 660,000 new units and as you see, san francisco is taking on a major responsibility in terms of jobs and housing. in terms of the transient kind of what explains the role of san francisco, is the lead of
7:33 am
the knowledge-based activities and it is not just the knowledge-based but it is the integration of the knowledge based core functions with other sectors including health and education and leisure and hospitality and this diverse economy what it is giving the regional economy a strength and it is not growing at the same pace that we have seen in previous decades but it is a healthy growth over the next three decades. there is a high expectation that employment growth will be more urban than in prior decades. san francisco has not taken on a lot of growth. and we are see a reversal of that plan and it is not that the office park and the jobs will disappear but in those areas we see a concentration of employment close to transit and
7:34 am
services. important to recognize the increase of latin os and the aging of the population and two-thirds over the next 30 years will be a senior population and that relates to how our housing production is changing. and we have been introducing more single family homes, but in 2000 to 2010, which was not a decade where they had a lot of housing pro-ducks, but the pro-ducks is shifting towards multifamily housing and in fact san francisco plays a major role is the first plan that the city is experiencing and producing multifamily housing and high-rise and residential development and that is a neat pattern for the city and county for the region. and so how are we embracing
7:35 am
those trends and the plan b area. so you are familiar with the priority development area with the framework that was developed not just with the legislation, as sb375 that we have been working on that for 7 and to 8 years and we have been working very closely with your staff and planning and transportation. and in recognizing what that neighborhood plan that you have in city and how those relate to the primary development in the regional level. and prior to that, while the largest conservation areas are the north bay, and santa clara and the urban parks and to retain the quality and the access of the open space. and so this is the over arching and this is the picture of how this plan is suspected to play out. as you can see the green, areas
7:36 am
is includes the open space, the farmland and the concept as to retain those as they are today. but the urbanized area is the gray area. and within that, the pink area you see, as the priority and development areas where the most growth is expected. so it is not just a retention of open space, it is the retention of many other small neighborhoods and towns, the character of some of the that i haders that are not absorbing a lot of growth. about 80 percent of the new homes are expected in this priority development area. and 60 percent of the new jobs. in the case of san francisco the growth is focused on the eastern side of the city. and they vary, across the city. there are some high density development and there is more
7:37 am
small-scale neighborhood, two to four story buildings throughout the city. and this diversity of priority development area is not just within the city, we have priority development areas in small towns like clover dale and other cities and so they range in scale with the intent in connecting again the transit with access to jobs. >> and gives you a picture of how san francisco is growing, in terms of housing, again, there is a significant growth in the expected in the city, and here you have three of the neighborhoods that will be taken on a significant portion of the growth. as you probably know the plan in the area are slightly higher than what you see in the local plans and that is part of
7:38 am
assessing where it will be in the city. there are high expectations in terms of the level of growth that can be accommodated in the city. and san francisco, is facing a particular challenge, all cities, medium sized cities and small cities are making different efforts to address this convergence of housing and employment. in san francisco, your experience a different pattern and san francisco coaleses in the financial district which is no longer a case, the set of jobs that you are absorbing in the region is a lot more complex and it really varies across the professional services and it is closely linked to entertainment and retail and that defines a new economic profile for the city in a new relationship with the rest of the region that we are hoping will be able to facilitate and are teaching this with the plan b area. so let me stop here.
7:39 am
and i will let him take over. >> i used to work here when the dinosaurs, and this room as beautiful as it was. i am here to tell you about the money and it should not take long, there is a lot of it and that is certainly the case and as you can see on this chart, close to 300 billion dollars in this plan that we forecast will be available over the next 25 to 30 years and the principle take away is that most of it is generated in this area. between the funds and the local funds that are primarily sales tax and transit fares and it is two-thirds of the money. and the down side of course is that has been some what of a necessity because of the lack
7:40 am
of investment and sacramento and washington and the good news is that when you raise your own money, and you can write your own rules and that is something that we have done to the benefit and not done a lot of highways in the area and you tear them down more than you build them and we need to invest in the transit and we need to invest in the bicycle modes and when we generate a lot of money we have a better time doing that when we deal with the federal or the state rule book. and we tend to divide this money in this planning exercise, into two different pots, pretty much just to cut to the chase because a lot of the money about 80 percent of the money that we call committed is committed to the specific purposes by law and long standing policy as most of the money that you can see in this slide is main nens of the existing system and 90 percent of this money is going to
7:41 am
maintain our existing infrastructure that is filling pot holes and replacing buses on a resonable schedule. we don't thifrpg that we should have a big argument about that every four years and the argument that we have is how much more discretionary money that we can bring to that very vital activity what we call fix it first and because our infrastructure in the bay area is frankly not getting any younger. and we need to take care of it if we are going to have the kind of straggy that this plan suggests. and the discretionary income in this plan is where we do tend to have the arguments and that is where we should have the arguments. and i want to spend a minute on where we have wound up on this one and what the board has been asked to consider in july. maybe starting at noon here on the clock hand and going clockwise, you will see that after spending 90 percent of
7:42 am
all of the available resources in the region on maintenance, this plan proposes to spend an additional quarter of all of our discretionary revenue on those same activities. and that is because of the importance that we place on these issues and i will say, we could spend this whole pot of discretionary money on maintenance activities and still not fill up the tank for shortfalls to maintain our state highway system and local transit system and road networks, i would call this a down payment, and working your way down toward 3:00 there you will see the one bay area grant program that i know quite a few of you staff certainly were very involved in hashing out and that plan, that program, again, is our attempt to match what you the local officials are making to try to grow
7:43 am
smarter and grow around transit. this is not a ton of money and we hope to do better next time but i think that it is an indication that we do want to incentivize and reward the jurisdictions that are taking on more of the growth and san francisco and the other two major cities in the region are certainly doing that. as you round 6:00 p.m. there at the bottom you will see a couple of regional initiatives to build the next generation of transit capacity through the bay area, quite a bit of that is happening within about two miles of this room right now. and as well as boosting our transit and freeway systems in terms of efficiency and not new capacity but squeezing more capacity out of the existing system. much like your transit effectiveness project with muni and finally we acknowledge that not all good ideas emanate from the region that each individual county in this case the city
7:44 am
and county have a lot of local priorities that the money needs to be tailored to and that is better done at the county wide level and here it is done right here in front of this board and so, we leave about 30 percent of this discretionary money for those purposes. when you add it altogether, given that heavy maintenance emphasis you will see that 80 percent of all of the money that we will be spending over the next 30 years is to take care of the system that we have built. in one way that can sound frustrating because we have a lot of growth coming in the region and a lot of new prioritis that we would like to take on. but i do believe that this heavy emphasis on maintenance and operation of our existing infrastructure is probably the best thing that we can do to support the stralgy that this plan outlines, i have often said that we have had an infill transportation plan for a long time and waiting for an infill land use policy to go along
7:45 am
with it and i think that what the plan bay area does is represents the coming together of those two things. san francisco, as i mentioned earlier has a lot of this action. and in terms of infrastructure investments and none of these projects are small. and many of them top a billion dollars, and they are very important investments that we are making the drive is an example and now the procidio parkway is a rehab project and it is a glorified rehab project but what it is really about is having the capacity in that corner that is not susceptible to earthquake and that can get people through when that major event occurs. and the downtown area with the cal tran extension and the transbay transit center and major facilities locate $in san francisco and they are not just yours, they are really regional assets xh is why we think that it is important to invest in
7:46 am
them. this plan, i think maybe not for the first time but to this ex-sent, certainly for the first time is focused heavily on performance. and we took every single project proposal over 50 million dollars and subjected it to a benefit cost analysis and we have done several equity analysis of this plan to make sure that the benefits and burdens are shared, evenly around the region and at the plan level, the commission and the abag board adopted a series of measure and they were not bashful in doing so they were quite aggressive in many respects and i am pleased to report that in the case of 6 of them as you can see here, we either met, or exceeded the targets. the most prominent is reducing greenhouse gas emissions per capita and we also made progress to an additional five targets where we did not get there and we certainly made a
7:47 am
good first effort and we hope to get the red of the way in the next plan and i think a worrying sign is that in the case of four of the targets we not only didn't make it through we did not head in the ride direction we went the wrong way. in the couple of these cases we may have picked the roning metric, i think not having per capita standards is a difficult thing to do when you are growing because the cap ta keeps growing, what you want to keep track of is how much per person are you making i am movements by these are areas that we want to focus the greater attention on in the next plan as we make the progress on all of these objectives. in closing we acknowledged that this plan under 375 is a first effort. and we do believe that it is a good start but very much is a plan that we need to build on i
7:48 am
think in two significant report respects. not just to take the plan and take a breather. this plan aoe peneds on a lot of active advocacy in sacramento and washington to try to make the progress that we need to make here. >> the most obvious on the land use side is the fact that the same legislature that gave us this charge of reducing greenhouse gas emissions through smarter growth is the one that took away the redevelopment authority which might have been the best tool to achieve that and so we are working closely with the senator's office on trying to fashion some kind of a redevelopment and framework and some replacement or series of replacements so that we can get that roughly one billion dollars of investment that was occurring in the bay area flowing again and in transportation we are look forward to the self-health motto to continuing we think that it would be more viable if
7:49 am
we had something closer to the majority vote for those ballot measures in stead of two-thirds. even though this city and some of your counter parts around the region have been successful and there are other counties that have not and we think as a matter of fundamental, we ought to have a voting standard that gives us more of a fighting chance. and finally we also acknowledged in this plan, that there are, i think pretty important subject areas that we were really only able to scratch the surface of and the one that i will mention in closing is the question of adaptation to climate change, this plan like a like of efforts these days dealing with global warming is trying to mitigate the effects of our own life styles on the planet by reducing the amount of emissions that we make per capita, that is the mitigation part. the fact is though, that there are a lot of emissions already
7:50 am
up in the atmosphere and the one that we need to worry about the most is sea level rise, if you look at a map of where it is and these pdas are and a lot of them are in the indunation zone. it makes sense for a lot of other reasons and i suppose that we could put a lot of growth on the tops of hills, and that would give us above sea level rise and defeat a lot of other purposes that we are trying to serve here. i will conclude on that point with the time line which shows you where we are headed, and which we hope is a july adoption, i know that several members of this board will be involved in voting on that. either as members of abag or mtc and we will be happy to answer any of your questions today. thank you mr. chairman.
7:51 am
>> thank you, very much. commissioner mar? >> thank you, i wanted to thank them for the regional public hearings that have been going on as well. i see from the east bay and other places how much you get beaten up for trying to plan wisely and how to for a more sustainable future and to reduce the greenhouse gases as well. dy want to ask, i know that there are different proposals from the right and the left that are brought up from the equity organizations and environmental groups on the left and on the right. tea party to libertarians and others. and i am just wondering if you could comment on the san francisco hearing that and helped it from bcdci and which weiner attended as well was fas fascinating and if you could give us a feedback from counties and i know that marin
7:52 am
county is coming up on april 29th. and another one on the 29th. and then may first on may day, alamena county and if you could give us some input and that is coming in from the regional counties. >> supervisor, they do say that beauty is in the eye of beholder and that is the case with this plan, using merin as an example. they comprise about 4 percent of our region's population today. and this plan assigns to them about 1 percent of the housing growth in the future. and you would think that we were bringing in a foreign invading army. some counties clearly think that any amount of growth is going to be destructive of the lifestyle they enjoy. and other counties like this one, i think are anxious to take on growth in the right places under the right conditions, and as you know,
7:53 am
one of the principle issues that have been raised about growth here as well as the other cities in the region is the question of displacement and the concern that when we do reenvest in some of these areas, where we would like to grow, that we make sure that we have adequate protections and opportunities for the residents who are already there. so, that sort of spans the spectrum, and i think that we are going to have a difficult challenge trying to please both of those faction, but i would acknowledge and i think that this was in response to a question that you may have asked at the last meeting that we had. that we have looked at a series of alternatives in the environmental impact report for this plan. and one of them was designed by the business communities and another one by advocates for low income and minority populations and i think that we are able to mix and match to a
7:54 am
limited extent in facing a plan, it is not something that we have done in the past but i think that will be the opportunity that we have principlely in june and july to see whether there are some places where we could nip here and tuck there to produce a better plan for the region as a whole. >> and i know that abag and the new deputy about them getting the estimates verses the state and i was wondering if merium could address that and that is a key point that some of the tea party and other folks are honing in on. >> there was relief in the department of finance population projections of about half of where we are including in the plan, so we are seeing about 2 million, and the department of finance will be
7:55 am
some numbers for the region for the numbers indicating that the population is expected to grow only by one million. and we have a series of meetings and conversations and we had a public discussion where we explained what were the different targets under the plan? and under the department of finance projections, the department of finance projections is primarily based on a demographic model, where they see the fertility rates and the mortality rates, with the small component of the migration and the jobs and they do not include economic trends and that is what led to this very low number. and yes, there have been several concerns about the numbers being too high and steve indicated that the spectrum was broad and there are people that said that we need to stop the population
7:56 am
growth. that is not under our purview. and we have assessed. >> and at the general assembly last week, in concerns about the senior population, booming from the baby boom to the senior boom and you mentioned that two-thirds of the potential growth will be senior and i am wondering how abag and the mtc are anticipating the senior boom and how we will address that with jobs as well. >> that is one of the components that really alines with the concept of the priority to have the housing close to transit and jobs and close to services hops and healthcare facility and it remains to be seen what will be s choices and the housing types there is an expansion of the care facilities for the senior
7:57 am
population. we think that with this framework, we are creating or providing a framework for aaccommodating that will accommodate that growing population. >> i am anticipating that as a baby boomer that will be here as soon and i don't know if avalos is on that cusp but there are two of us on this eleven member board, but thank you. >> i have always wanted to be a baby boomer. >> okay. colleagues any other comments or questions? >> we would like to thank you for your presentation, and thank you for being here, and thank you for your great work on this. this has been, abag for a couple of years and a lot of work and a lot of effort involved both of the agencies
7:58 am
bringing this together and still a ways to go but thank you for all of your efforts. >> okay. >> this is an information item. colleagues, so we can go on to our next item. >> public comment? >> public comment on this item. very sorry. >> any member of the public that would like to comment, please come forward. >> give me one second. it is a bit slow. >> give him one second there is a bit of a lag. >> will you mind using the other mic? i am having difficult. >> thank you my apologies. >> and 140. and could you reset the time? >> yes. the pot holes and it is just, it is hard to understand where the money is
7:59 am
going, and as far as the muni situation, i think that you know, we need to focus in on fixing what we have now, and instead of trying to expand, i think that the subway was a real bad state because i believe that will take away services and in addition to that, no doubt it will have an impact on gentrification in china town and that is one way to get rid of the poor people. >> i would imagine that many of the homes are condos that are developed there and would be second homes for the people who are leaving abroad. and that is the wrong type of housing as you know. and with the limited opportunities in san francisco it is important that we stop
8:00 am
and try to figure out, that we are not building the housing and we just heard from the report that two-thirds of the growth will be seniors and seniors, and it will be in the able to afford these new condos and i think that we need to now look at perhaps, a lower rate, you know, affordable housing where seniors could leave and also, in regards to nursing care that type of thing has to be addressed, hospitals. and our those are things that i know that it is not part of the trend of your committee but as city leaders, you have to have four sight as to what is going to happen in the next 30 years and i think that we have to fix what we have, or fix where we or what is broken now and we know what is ok